* no warning with old-fashioned function headers
@ 1999-06-16 2:32 Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
1999-06-30 15:43 ` Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS @ 1999-06-16 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: egcs
Is there a good reason for this x() not giving a warning, even with
-Wall? There is a warning with y().
I expect there's a note somewhere in the code that explains both this
and why the gcc code itself uses the old sort of function headers, but
I haven't found it ...
int x(a, b)
int a;
int b;
{
return x(a);
}
int y(int a, int b)
{
return y(a);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* no warning with old-fashioned function headers
1999-06-16 2:32 no warning with old-fashioned function headers Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
@ 1999-06-30 15:43 ` Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS @ 1999-06-30 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: egcs
Is there a good reason for this x() not giving a warning, even with
-Wall? There is a warning with y().
I expect there's a note somewhere in the code that explains both this
and why the gcc code itself uses the old sort of function headers, but
I haven't found it ...
int x(a, b)
int a;
int b;
{
return x(a);
}
int y(int a, int b)
{
return y(a);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-06-30 15:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1999-06-16 2:32 no warning with old-fashioned function headers Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
1999-06-30 15:43 ` Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).